March 15, 2017

Women Who Love Cars, Also Known as Autogynephilia

This New York Times article (which arrived in our office through a worm hole from a parallel world uncannily like our own) covers the autogynephilia theory of sexual attraction. Be ready for a bumpy ride!
Anne loves her sports car. Photo: Jupiter Images

There has been a lot of discussions lately about Ray Blanchard's controversial autogynephilia theory.

This is most likely caused by the fact that both right and left wing extremists have found that his theory can be used to attack a particular group of women.

Autogynephilia is Greek, made from the words for "self-propelling" (auto), "woman" (gyne) and "love" (philia) . In other words: Women who love cars.

A typical "autogynephiliac" would be Anne, a university professor who told us that she loves driving around in the city in her red sports car:

"I feel powerful and sexy. The car is like an extension of myself. It expresses my true self," she tells the New York Times

Rosita, a 35 year old Latina nurse living in San Diego puts it this way:

"I want a 1967 Ford Mustang. I want to feel it roaring under me. I want its beauty, its strength, its speed!"

Inside the mind of Ray Blanchard

Ray Blanchard, who is a traditionalist evolutionary psychologists, argues that autogynephilia is a paraphilia (a sexual perversion). The autogynephile women are suffering from a so-called "erotic target location error", as they -- according to him -- love cars more than men.


This  leads to "reduced evolutionary fitness", he says,  i.e. reduced chances of getting offspring. The condition must therefore be considered a sexual disorder.

He has argued that there are two mutually exclusive types of women: Those that love cars (the autogynephiliacs) and the non-autogynephiliacs, who love men.

There are no lesbians in Blanchard's model. As he said to Motherboard: "I do not think there are any female perverts." Some former colleagues of his  have told the New York Times that he does not get out much.

The Girl who Wanted to be Steve McQueen

J. Michael Bailey has popularized Blanchard's theory in the controversial book The Girl  who Wanted to be Steve McQueen, 

On the basis of a  random and completely personal sample of five women in a car park, he has argued that the non-autogynephilic women are naturally feminine and attractive. "I would boink her anytime," as he said of one of his "non-autogynephilic" respondents.

The autogynephiliacs are masculine and unattractive, according to him.

Activists strike back
Photo from Bailey's book, where the caption reads:
"Unattractive, masculine autogynephiliac."
Photo: Jose Luis Pelaez Inc

Needless to say, women who do love cars feel offended by this theory.

So-called "transport activists" have argued that the whole theory only reflects old-fashioned sexist views of what women should be like, and that these conservative  researchers are projecting their prejudices onto their respondents.

They point out that young girls are discouraged from playing with cars as kids, and that an open egalitarian society would allow women to love cars.

Autogynephilia in Men

Professor Charles Moser has criticized Blanchard, arguing that such fantasies are also common among men.

In a study of male respondents he found that:
"By the common definition of ever having erotic arousal to the thought or image of driving around in an expensive sports car, 93% of the respondents would be classified as autogynephilic.  Using a more rigorous definition of 'frequent' arousal to multiple items,  and the more generic term "car", 28% would be classified as autogynephilic."
Blanchard has dismissed the study arguing that the socio-cultural context for driving men is completely different from the one of women. Men do not get aroused by the idea of driving a sports car, according to Blanchard, they get aroused by the fact that the car will attract women. They get turned on by women, he says, not cars.

Evolutionary dead end

Philosopher Felix Conrad has drawn attention to the fact that Blanchard thinks of autogynephilia as an evolutionary dead end for women, while he finds it natural that men buy expensive cars:

"Why on earth should men's love for cars be less evolutionary disadvantageous than the feelings of women?" he asks.

The reason is probably because Blanchard & Co still live in a world where women are coy and passive and men are outgoing and sexually aggressive. As Blanchard points out: "The car is the peacock feathers of modern man, not of the modern woman."

Bailey has argued that a woman with a sports car is likely to scare away men. The fact that autogynephiles are as likely to marry and get kids as non-autogynephiles is ignored.

We see a repeating pattern in that Blanchard and his followers seem to ignore commonly acknowledged facts as well as input from women who love cars.

The sexologist and Blanchard supporter James Cantor puts it this way:
"We are scientists and our facts are always facter that the facts of those who experience such conditions. What do they know?"
Loving cars as something natural

Jack Molay, a trans-supportive blogger, accepts that women who love cars exist:

"There is nothing unnatural and perverted in liking cars," he says, "no more than loving clothes,  jewelry or art."

He has coined a new and less toxic term for women who love cars: "autocrossdreamers".

Autogynephilia as romantic attachment

To our knowledge, there has been only one "autogynephile" woman who has embraced the autogynephilia theory.

Anne Lawrence, author of the book Women Trapped in Steel Bodies, believes the attraction to cars is a separate sexuality which also includes romantic notions of long term commitment.

She still has the VW Beetle she bought back in 1981.
Anne Lawerence in her car "Herbie".

Other so-called "separatist" trans women have worked hard to stop the term from being used against them.

Kay Brown, who runs the blog On the Science of Changing Gears, has spent a lot of time crunching statistics in order to prove that women who love airplanes are not in the same positions as those who love cars.

The statistics show that a lot of women who love airplanes also love cars, but Brown (following Blanchard) argues that they are all lying.

"They pretend to love airplanes because it makes them socially acceptable. But there is no aerogynephilia," she says. In other words: Some transport women are perverts, but she is not.

Brown insists that the psyche of those who love cars is so different from those who do, that the two group should be offered different health care services.

"Young, vulnerable, women who love men, should not be forced to sit in the same room as old, mannish, autogynephiliacs," she says. She has suggests that transport health clinics bring in autogynecologists. who can focus on helping the autogynephiles only.

Trans-exclusionary radical feminists

The autogynephilia theory has also gained the attention of radical feminists. Trans-exclusionary Radical Feminist Cathy Brennan has done her best to stop car-loving women from gaining access to feminist festivals.
Doxing of autogynephiliac.
Photo from Cathy Brennan's transport-exclusionary
radical feminist blog Gender Identity Watch.
(ysbrandcosijn)

"These should be weehmyn's parking spaces only," she argues in an interview. "We cannot have perverted and greasy wannabe men threaten the safety of real weehmyn."

One of Brennan's favorite hobbies is scouring the internet for pictures of naked transfolk and reposting them on her blog.

Rumours of her owning a 1973 Thunderbird has been vehemently denied.

The boys of Breitbart

Right wing conservatives, and especially those of the religious persuasion, have also embraced the theory, and use it actively on sites like Breitbart and The Federalist.

As one so-called "nationalist" argued over at Breitbart:
"Women loving cars is unnatural and against American values. Women should be home in the kitchen, taking care of their man and their children, not driving around making their men cucks."
This entry got strong support from a representative of the Saudi Arabian embassy, who pointed out that in their country women cannot even get a driver's licence.

A fundamentalist "Evangelical" chimed in: "Did Jesus allow women to drive cars? Of course not! Jesus was a true Conservative supporting traditional values and white Americans."

The Romans and the Pharisees were not available for comment.

The right wing extremists have now presented so-called highway  bills, where women who own cars will no longer be allowed to use public roads, as they are considered a threat to travelling children and female passengers.

The Texas BS2 law is expected to be adapted later this year, unless the petroleum and car industries manage to stop it.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott has caused some consternation by his controversial remarks about women's ability to park cars. But this week he went one step further, arguing that: "If we allow women to drive on public roads, what's next? Should be let them work outside the home as well?"
President Knowles-Carter has publicly dismissed the
autogynephilia theory as "sexist nonsense".

President Beyoncé G. Knowles-Carter is expected to implement new regulations aimed at  stopping such highway laws shortly:

"These misogynistic laws go against what it means to be a true American," she told the New York Times.

"This is a democratic country. This is a free country. And we give our citizens room to make their own journeys, finding their own true selves, whether they travel by car or in the  spirit."

Hashtags: #AlternativeHistory #AlternativeFacts #ParallellDimension

Click here for a presentation of the autogynephilia theory of our dimension. 



12 comments:

joanna Santos said...

"We are scientists and our facts are always facter that the facts of those who experience such conditions. What do they know?"

Jack is this a real quote from Cantor? if so what a complete idiot. To say that gender dysphorics don't understand what they are facing is a complete cop out because we most certainly do. But what I have been pointing out in my blog of late more and more is that despite these wackos the rubber hits the road moment is having to deal with transitioning transgender people on a day to day basis. In other words, as young gay or heterosexual people transition they need to be treated like human beings and so the baloney being spewed out by Blanchard, Kay Brown and others will not matter one whit.

We are missing major pieces of the puzzle and this conjecture has clearly been cooked up for self-serving purposes of prejudice or to protect a self-explanation of a transition (as in Brown's case).

I don't see anyone picking up the torch of this horrible theory and as more people come to know a trans person it will fall away into history as just another failed attempt to marginalize a group of people.

joanna Santos said...

I suspect the quote is not genuine although the intent behind it certainly could be.

Jack Molay said...

//Jack is this a real quote from Cantor?//

It is not a real quote. But this was the message he gave to me when I engaged him on twitter, questioning his real insight into things trans. This was science. He knew better than me, because he was a scientist.

This is ironic on so many levels. Not only does the trans experience give you a unique position to understand what it means to be trans, and question theories that misunderstand trans, but also because so many of the trans activists who argue against the Blanchard clan is as educated as they are -- and more. And that applies to me as well.

joanna Santos said...

and to me as I have been researching this topic for years.

Their arrogance is steeped in the idea that their conjecture must be right because it comes from a trained professional whereas you and I are uniquely placed to be able to analyze as well as experience first hand what this means which is far more valuable. This is why I trust the Jamie Veale, Julia Serano or Felix much more than them.

joanna Santos said...

I wonder if Cantor does not believe that his being gay gives him unique perspective. How ironic if he thought it did.

L.A. L. said...

Hahahahahah!

Loving cars as autogynephilia for women!

I personally have always believed that it was either transgender beauty that was the ideal or that women had always wanted to be like feminine men.

Jack Molay said...

@Joanna

//I wonder if Cantor does not believe that his being gay gives him unique perspective. How ironic if he thought it did.//

I do think Cantor got pissed at Felix for pointing out that he was gay. That had apparently nothing to do with anything.

Of course it does.

They are suffering from the kind of scientism that some natural scientists seem to fall prey to: The idea that if you are a "real" scientist you are automatically disinterested and objective. Anyone who knows anything about the history of science know that this is not true, including the best natural scientists. Maybe it is this lack of insight into the importance of cultural and social context that makes them make this mistake.

You know me, I am not that fond of the post-structuralist extremism, but they definitely have a point when they argue that language and symbols are part of a larger culture system that is oppressive if you cannot see through it.

Blanchard has simply repackaged the 19th century mistake of believing gender expression, gender identity and sexual orientation are three sides of the same thing. But he is so deeply embedded in the prejudices of those days that he does not see it.

@Jen,

Now that it is interesting. Women want to be feminine men? Please explain...

Lisa Mullin said...

LOL I love it, wish I had written it.

Cantor is very conflicted about his homosexuality. He did a paper on trying to prove that it was a sexual paraphilia and came to the conclusion that 'not all the evidence was there yet but it might be....'. You almost get the feeling that he would feel better if he could think of himself as 'really' a heterosexual man with a paraphilia.

I have have seen that thinking with some trans women (virtually all part time) who self identify as having AGP. Psychologically it is less threatening to them. They can think of themselves as 'really' cis men with a 'kink', rather than someone with gender dysphoria who really needs to think about and come to terms with their gender issues in some way.

Lisa Mullin said...

James Cantor:

"Male homosexuality is associated with an entirely different set of correlates and (therefore) etiological contributors from female homosexuality. It is therefore possible that male homosexuality is a paraphilia, whereas female homosexuality is not."

"Overall, homosexuality and the paraphilias appear to share the features of onset and course (both homosexuality and paraphilia being life-long), but they appear to differ on sex ratio, fraternal birth order, handedness, IQ and cognitive profile, and neuroanatomy. Although there have been some reports on prevalence and on physical height, these literatures are not yet reliable enough to be informative. Thus, considered together, the existing data seem more consistent with the conclusion that homosexuality is a characteristic distinct from the paraphilias."

"Because only few paraphilic interests have received much scientific attention, it also remains possible that each paraphilia is associated with its own, novel set of correlates, and that homosexuality is no more novel in its profile of correlates than would be any other paraphilic interest.

Thus, although homosexuality is probably better said to be distinct from the paraphilias, that conclusion is still quite tentative."


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3310132/

Jack Molay said...

//They can think of themselves as 'really' cis men with a 'kink', rather than someone with gender dysphoria who really needs to think about and come to terms with their gender issues in some way.//

I suspect that is one of the reason some crossdreamers stop taking part in this section of transgender culture. In the hierarchy of transgressions being a perverted man is better than being a transgender woman. I try to stress the fact that having crossdreaming fantasies do not necessarily mean that you are gender dysphoric or a transgender woman. We are all living somewhere on a continuum (or continuums). But maybe the some of those that are truly transsexual are those who need this kind of out-of-jail card the most.

As for female homosexuality being fundamentally different from the male one: This is another effect of the aggressive male/coy female syndrome. As soon as you accept that women may be a liberated, proactive, aggressive and promiscuous as men, the whole theory falls apart.

Anonymous said...

Jack... outrageous to label Blanchard as a biologist and especially 'evolutionary biologist.' Firstly E.B. is a science and Blanchard doesn't subscribe to accepted notions of scientific proof or discourse. He is a quack and charlatan who, when convenient, tries to throw in some vague associations with E.B.

Jack Molay said...

He is definitely not a biologist, and calling him one would be -- as you say -- outrageous.

The term I have used here is "evolutionary psychologist", which refers to a strand of social Darwinism found in some of the more traditionalist circles of psychology.

Join the Crossdream Life Forum!